MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1933123663 · doi:10.29173/pandpr25364

Toward Experiencing Academic Mentorship

2015· article· en· W1933123663 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Leslie Robinson

Bibliographic record

VenuePhenomenology & Practice · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Education and Learning Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMentorshipGraduate studentsReflection (computer programming)PedagogyLived experiencePsychologyMedical educationSociologyMedicineComputer sciencePsychoanalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The idea of mentorship has become rather fashionable in academia today. Indeed mentorship is claimed, promoted and even mandated as something we can expect to experience as graduate students. Yet what is it really like to experience it? Drawing on concrete descriptions and phenomenological reflection I attend to graduate students’ actual experiences of mentorship (and not mentorship) to uncover aspects of the mentee experience for what it is rather than how it is claimed to be. Graduate students’ experiences reveal ways that mentoring moments variously escape us as somehow deficient or in excess of what we expect them to be. From a vantage that attends specifically to the mentee experience, points of reflection are offered for reimagining what the mentorship experience could become.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.749
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.317
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.170 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhenomenology & PracticeSame topicInnovative Education and Learning PracticesFrench-language works237,207